Budget windfall for California schools

Much of the state's surplus billions will go to K-12 schools, like Redwood City's Clifford Elementary, and community colleges.

Much of the state's surplus billions will go to K-12 schools, like Redwood City's Clifford Elementary, and community colleges.

Photo: Paul Chinn, The Chronicle

Photo: Paul Chinn, The Chronicle

Image
1of/1

Caption

Close

Image 1 of 1

Much of the state's surplus billions will go to K-12 schools, like Redwood City's Clifford Elementary, and community colleges.

Much of the state's surplus billions will go to K-12 schools, like Redwood City's Clifford Elementary, and community colleges.

Photo: Paul Chinn, The Chronicle

Budget windfall for California schools

1 / 1

Back to Gallery

April was a good month for California's finances - a really good month.

In the 30 days that account for more tax revenue coming into the state coffers than the rest of the year, California finished nearly $4.7 billion above what the governor projected in his budget for the current fiscal year.

But before the various interests at the Capitol get visions of sugar plums dancing in their heads with how to spend that money, the vast majority of it, if not all of it, will have to be spent on K-12 public schools and community colleges in the state.

It's a function of voter-approved Proposition 98, which mandates how much money has to be spent on schools in a given year. The formula is beyond complex, but typically it works out to the state spending 40 percent or so of revenues it receives on the schools.

The Legislative Analyst's Office estimates that between 85 and 95 percent of the extra cash collected this year will go to schools.

So why the big jump? Well, last year the governor and Legislature tweaked how they handled cash surpluses and money owed to schools. The Legislative Analyst's Office raised concerns that something like this could happen, and now it has.

The Legislature was "fully briefed, there were multiple opinions on this, they agreed with the administration's approach and that was their prerogative," said Jason Sisney, deputy legislative analyst for state and local finance.

But there may yet be a silver lining for those who advocate for programs other than the schools. The big jump likely will mean that the governor's May revision of the budget, which is due out in just over a week, will have a higher forecast for revenue coming in during the next fiscal year.

And that's money they can fight over.

Taxes and fees advance: Speaking of all the money gushing into the state treasury, lawmakers at the Capitol this week passed several measures that would create additional tax and fee increases.

They include a tax on oil that is pumped up from California, a tax on soda and other sugary beverages, and a fee on shoppers who don't use their own bags at a retail establishment that sells food, beer, wine or liquor.

The oil tax proposal, SB241 by Sen. Noreen Evans, D-Santa Rosa, would put a 9.5 percent tax on large oil companies for the extraction of the black gold. Estimates are that it would generate $2 billion per year, with the money directed to public education and state parks.

Soda drinkers would lose some fat in their wallets under the SB622 tax proposal by Sen. Bill Monning, D-Carmel, which would add 1 cent per ounce to the cost of a sugary drink. That money would go to combat childhood obesity.

And finally, Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, has proposed SB700, a nickel-a-bag fee for shoppers who don't use their own bags. That money would be spent on environmental projects and parks.

All passed out of their first committees, but the real test will be whether they get the two-thirds approval needed to pass out of the Senate, given that legislative leaders and the governor have already said they're not interested in any tax increases this year.

The war on drug charges: Last year, a proposal by Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, to make simple possession of any drug a misdemeanor offense rather than a felony was crushed in a vote by his Senate colleagues.

Well, this week, many of those same colleagues approved a similar measure, which now heads to the state Assembly. There's one key difference, though: the bill, SB649, makes possession a "wobbler," which means prosecutors decide whether to charge a felony or a misdemeanor.

One supporter of the bill who also supported the previous version, Sen. Roderick Wright, D-Inglewood (Los Angeles County), said this is the kind of criminal justice issue where people of color are disproportionately targeted for arrest and prosecution.